Desperate Deep State Planning Intense Chaos in 2023 – Alex Newman

 

Alex Newman with Storm'n Norm'n 

PROOF US GOVT IS KILLING AMERICANS

On today’s Dr. Jane Ruby Show, Dr. Jane welcomes former EcoHealth GOF Vice Pres Dr. Andrew Huff to talk about the Truth About Wuhan and what he calls the lab leak. Was it intentional or accidental? Dr. Jane asks him the tough questions to expose the DOD mass genocide operation on both the Covid scam and the bioweapon shots created to take out Americans. This is the Dr Jane Ruby Show and you’re about to enter Truth in Medicine.

This just in: Source

Scientists warn that continuing the course of booster COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations may pose risks of “enhanced disease severity” for those re-infected with COVID-19 and thus the administration of boosters “should be preceded with caution.”

“Our findings revealed that repeated dosing after the establishment of vaccine response might not further improve the antigen-specific reactivity; instead, it could cause systematic tolerance and inability to generate effective humoral and cellular immune responses to current SARS-CoV-2 variants.”

In other words, health authorities have mandated young people get a shot that may fully impair their immune system’s capacity to protect them from the very variants the shots were intended to neutralize.

___________________

It's not only the U.S. Government...

It's the goal of the WEF.

If we do not have control over our personal economic decisions, we are serfs.

Biden, Trudeau and AMLO Release the “Declaration of North America” – Prepare your Affairs Accordingly

January 11, 2023 | Sundance | 379 Comments

Joe Biden, Justin Trudeau and Lopez-Obrador released an action outline called the “Declaration of North America.”

The DNA is a declaration centered around six pillars: 1) diversity, equity, and inclusion; 2) climate change and the environment; 3) competitiveness; 4) migration and development; 5) health; and 6) regional security. The action-oriented outline provides the roadmap for the ideological intentions of the three governments.

I would strongly urge everyone to review the declaration [READ HERE], because just like a 5-year financial plan, every family should first know the scale of the chaos they are going to encounter in order to make plans to secure their life.

The declaration does not need much interpretation to be understood, this is the framework for how the United States, Canada and Mexico see the future of North America.

Unfortunately, only a miniscule number of Americans will read the Declaration, and yet it is information like this that tells you the intent of government in our life.

As an example, ask the next person you see advocating for Harmeet Dhillon as RNC Chairperson, or Ron DeSantis as a viable 2024 candidate, what the Declaration of North America means and how will Dhillon or DeSantis operate to change the direction of the DNA intent.

I guarantee you not a single person will have any clue what you are talking about, and every single one of them will look at you like a cow just licked them on the forehead. If my assumption is incorrect, I will eat a plain rice cake live on your selected TV show or podcast.

CTH will never stop fighting against the totality of the corrupt system, yet it is increasingly frustrating to see decent people maintaining the cycle of abuse from both the Republican and Democrat wing of the UniParty.

(1) We need to get as self-sufficient as possible.

(2) We need a worker’s rebellion, a movement similar in effect to the Solidarity movement.

All cultural and social issues are downstream from the ability of an American to live in a sovereign nation as a sovereign individual.  If we do not have control over our personal economic decisions, we are serfs.

Focus discussions with the working-class community; focus on the principles of economics and national stability that comes from economic security.  I am increasingly convinced the working-class is where the solution to this mess is going to come from.

Those who control government, the corporations who pull the strings, know a worker’s strike is risk to their effort and they are doing everything to create systems and processes that would avoid one.  Uncontrolled mass economic migration is a countermeasure to dilute the ability of a worker’s strike to impact political outcomes.

They are few, we are still many – but losing ground and need to work with urgency.

Instead of trying to plug the dam with fingers and toes, invest in scuba gear for your family.  Once secured, then move upstream to the origination of the inbound flows.

What was he thinking? Dumb question...he doesn't know how to think.

 

Joe Biden Is Thinking About Banning Your Gas Stove

DARREN ORF

January 10, 2023, 2:34 PM

Joe Biden Is Thinking About Banning Your Gas StoveAlex Wong - Getty Images

• The Biden Administration is considering a ban on gas stoves.

• A federal agency says gas stoves are linked to serious health conditions like cancer and childhood asthma.

• Gas stoves are also a greenhouse gas contributor.

When things are going well, people will often say, “now we’re cooking with gas.” President Joe Biden’s administration would like to consider a different choice of words.

On Monday, an agency commissioner with the U.S. Consumer Product and Safety Commission (CPSC) told Bloomberg that a ban on gas stoves in homes is “on the table,” citing the appliance’s link to serious health conditions such as respiratory illness, cancer, and childhood asthma. “This is a hidden hazard,” commissioner Richard Trumka Jr. told Bloomberg, “Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.”

The CPSC (whose Twitter is famously excellent) clarified in a statement that the agency currently has no official proposal to ban gas stoves, but that its staff “plans to start gathering data and perspectives from the public on potential hazards associated with gas stoves, and proposed solutions to those hazards later this year.” With an estimated 40 percent of homes relying on gas stoves, the CPSC says any regulation of these devices would be “a lengthy process.”

But the problem with gas stoves isn’t just health issues. The appliance is also a greenhouse gas contributor as commercial and residential buildings account for 13 percent of heat-trapping gas emissions, most of which comes from gas appliances.

The CPSC’s ban consideration is the latest salvo in a years-long battle over the controversial appliance. In 2019, Berkeley, California, became the first city in the U.S. to ban gas appliances, including furnaces, stoves, and ovens, in new commercial and residential buildings. Other cities in California as well as New York City and Seattle soon followed suit.

In a sign of the times, Republican-controlled legislatures in 20 states went in the opposite direction and passed what’s known as “preemption laws” to prohibit cities in their states from passing similar measures. While gas advocates argue that gas appliance health concerns are miniscule compared to other things like cigarettes, environmental law experts tell CNN that banning gas stoves is “low-hanging fruit” in humanity’s battle with climate change. A CPSC ban would be a game changer in that a federal ban would supersede all of this state-level drama (though a protracted legal battle is all but a certainty).

It’s unclear exactly what a federal ban would look like as the CPSC is only now gathering information, but if it follows laws already passed in many U.S. cities, the ban would likely put the kibosh on gas appliances in any new residential or commercial building.

As for the millions of gas stoves out there already, the Biden Administration has a plan for that. As people begin hunting for new stoves (with many websites suggesting you should make the switch anyway) the newly passed Inflation Reduction Act offers up to $840 in rebates to entice those on the fence.

For now, gas stoves are safe from federal regulation, but those arguing for a ban are now, ironically, “cooking with gas.”

Nancy Pelosi ~ GUILTY OF INSURRECTION ! *

Many of us (and that would include me) assumed from the get-go that Donald Trump was not responsible for any of the attacks on our Nation's Capitol on January 6, 2021.  There was plenty of video evidence that proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the Capitol Police were complicit...or to be more direct, responsible for the coordinating the events of that day.  Now who's in charge of the Capitol Police?  Why, Nancy Pelosi, the then Speaker of the House of Representatives...we could even say, "She's the Chief of Police." and we wouldn't be too far off. 

The Trump rally was a scheduled event and most everyone knew well in advance when and where it would be held...notably, Nancy Pelosi knew and given her record of Anti-American politics she had plenty of time to organize her infiltrators (In my humble opinion, paid for by George Soros) and don them with GAGA caps (or any other Trump paraphernalia) in order to make it appear as some insurrection as they would call it later.

Now many of us (again) would talk non-publicly about our assumptions because we are at the bottom of the news chain and don't nearly have the notoriety of the mainstream media but after reading this piece by Victoria Taft, I dare say we all assumed correctly. ~ Norman E. Hooben

If I can borrow a line from Andrew Wilkow, "We're right, they're wrong, and that's the end of the story.

*I made up that headline to attract your attention. Did it work?

More Proof That Nancy Pelosi Was More Responsible for J6 Riot Than Trump
BY VICTORIA TAFT  JANUARY 08, 2023

A little-noticed bill passed before Christmas shows that the U.S. Senate knows Nancy Pelosi had more to do with the U.S. Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, than anything President Trump did that day. Indeed, Nancy Pelosi could be crowned Queen of the Mob, since her actions led to the crashing of the perimeter fences, general dysfunction, and deaths of Trump supporters that day.

Even after the one-sided January 6 Committee left Pelosi’s role on the cutting room floor, there’s one inescapable conclusion: If she’d done her job, there would have been no riot, no deaths of Trump supporters, no show trials, and no political prisoners sitting in solitary confinement in a D.C. gulag for two years awaiting trial. And there would have been no need for federal agents to “orchestrate” a riot.

Pelosi was more responsible for the marauding mob at the Capitol that day than anything President Trump did to “incite” his huge crowd of supporters — which he provably did not.

And here’s how we know this.

On Monday night, December 12, senators unanimously passed a measure to remove authority for calling out the National Guard from politicians like Nancy Pelosi and gave it over to the Capitol Police.

Despite heightened threat assessments by federal authorities showing problems ahead of January 6, 2021, and the Trump Administration offering National Guard help, the people who were supposed call out the Guard, the speaker and D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, wanted no Guard on scene due to optics. Bowser had battled with Trump over National Guard presence during the BLM/Antifa riots in the past and didn’t want the militarized look in D.C. If she needed them at all for January 6, she decided the Guard would be unarmed and relegated to traffic control.

Pelosi’s office “was heavily involved in planning and decision-making before and during the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and micromanaged the Sergeant at Arms,” according to texts and other communications that came to light after January 6.

From early December 2020, Pelosi aides attended regular meetings with Irving and Sund to discuss the security plan. So hands-on was Pelosi’s chief of staff Terri McCullough that, at one point, she was editing details of parking, event timing and “language regarding official business visitors” for the Joint Session.

The Pelosi team’s messages and posts were exposed in an investigative report by the same House Republicans Pelosi removed from the J6 Committee. The messages show how Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund begged Pelosi and the Sergeant at Arms to plus-up security. His request for help was only satisfied after the riot fizzled out.

The New York Post reported that the GOP investigation showed that “House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving, who answered to Pelosi as one of three voting members of the Capitol Police Board, ‘succumbed to political pressures from the Office of Speaker Pelosi and House Democrat leadership,’ was compromised by politics and did not adequately prepare for violence at the Capitol.”

The House and Senate sergeant at arms and Capitol Police Chief Sund resigned their jobs after the disaster, which could have been prevented.

But in a move the same week, the Democrat-run Senate tacitly affirmed that Nancy Pelosi royally screwed up by failing to take Trump up on his offer of using the Guard and preventing what the J6 Cassandras said was worse than the Civil War or the 9/11 attacks. How incredibly insulting.

Of course, after the unrest, neither woman was held accountable for failing to act. And the aftermath of the breach was more politicized than anything we’ve seen since the FBI and Hillary Clinton worked with actual Russian spies to create a fiction that Trump was a Russian secret agent.

Efforts to smear the outspoken Trump lived on in the outrageously one-sided January 6 Committee proceedings and continue to this day.

After kicking off Republicans from the January 6 Committee, unprecedented in the history of our country, Pelosi also struck a deal with her hand-selected gaslighters to not be a subject of the probe. Her fingerprints were to be wiped from the proceedings.

But if you know where to look you can see them.

Victoria Taft is an award-winning journalist, writer and terrestrial radio talk host, heard in Seattle and on the rest of the Left Coast. Listen to her twice weekly  “Adult in the Room Podcast.” Find her at VictoriaTaft.com  Parler, MeWe, Minds, Locals, Twitter & Facebook. Her book mocking antifa will be out this year. For media inquiries write: Victoria@VictoriaTaft.com 

Read more by Victoria Taft

Has Barack Obama gone from ex-president to Democrat party crime boss?

Posted by Storm'n Norm'n

The following from American Thinker

January 7, 2023

Buried News: Obama muscled Zuckerberg to censor Trump -- and made an example of him

By Monica Showalter

Has Barack Obama gone from ex-president to Democrat party crime boss?
It sure looks like it, based on a new report about his treatment of Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
Investigative reporter Lee Smith has got a stunning report that ran this week in Tablet, comparable in impact to that report by Molly Ball at Time who wrote about how elites conspired to "fortify democracy" by rigging the election against President Trump in 2020 and afterwards thought it was a smart thing to crow about.

Smith's report begins with how the FBI "hacked" Twitter, not just engaging in a "master-canine" relationship as Twitter files reporter Matt Taibbi put it in one of his reports, but actually infiltrating the company and controlling it from within, rendering it a corporate Zombie.

According to Smith:

The Twitter files’ disclosures about the coordination between the company and spy agencies to fix presidential elections sheds light on the nature of Twitter v. Holder, which was eventually decided in the government’s favor shortly before Baker joined the company.

But something else was going on behind the scenes: Social media platforms were already being assimilated into the intelligence services.

That Twitter section alone is well worth reading, very well-explained by Smith for its details on the collusion that was deeper than many suspected -- leading to a never-told-before story about how Obama muscled Facebook like a mafia don.

The Obama administration also realized that it could lean hard on monopoly social media platforms in order to gain political advantages—and it could make companies that weren’t compliant pay a price.

Here's how it worked, emphasis mine:

First strike got you a dressing down from the White House: Weeks after the 2016 vote, for instance, Obama pulled Mark Zuckerberg aside at a conference in Peru and read him out about not doing more to keep Russian disinformation off Facebook. The reality is that Russia spent around $135,000 on Facebook ads, a small percentage of what presidential campaigns typically spend on a single day before lunch. But Obama wasn’t worried about Russia—he struck deals with Vladimir Putin to advance his own idiosyncratic foreign policy goals, like the nuclear agreement with Russia’s ally Iran. Obama’s problem was Trump.

As he was leaving office, Obama stamped the U.S. government’s seal of approval on Russiagate, ordering his spy chiefs to draft an official assessment claiming Putin helped put Trump in the White House. Since then, in Deep State parlance, “Russia” equals Trump and stopping “Russian disinformation” means censoring Trump, his supporters, and anyone else opposed to the national security apparatus’s takeover of the public communications infrastructure. Since Zuckerberg didn’t keep Trump off Facebook in 2016, he had to put up $400 million to drive votes to Democrats in 2020—and even that wasn’t enough. In 2021, Democratic Party insiders working together with Zuckerberg’s Big Tech competitor, eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, sent a fake whistleblower after him to testify before congress that Facebook was bad for teenage girls.

Suddenly all the pieces fit together -- the Obama pieties about Russia he knew couldn't be true; the forced cash cough-up for Zuckerberg's Democrat operatives to take over election apparats even as elected officials protested -- which was actually declared bribery in Wisconsin; the phony whistleblower.

Smith continued, telling us how it all came together (emphasis mine):
In April, as Musk first said he wanted to buy Twitter and save free speech, Obama embarked on a “disinformation” tour, which took him to several college campuses to promote the un-American virtues of censorship. He first visited his hometown to speak at a University of Chicago conference, “Disinformation and the Erosion of Democracy.” Other guests included Anne Applebaum, an early advocate of the collusion conspiracy theory who pushed the spy-service fiction in dozens of her Washington Post columns. Also in attendance was former CISA head Chris Krebs, now famous for congressional testimony in which he claimed the 2020 election was the most secure ever.

EIP principals from the Stanford Internet Observatory were featured speakers at the daylong seminar at the Palo Alto university where Obama made the second stop on his April “disinformation” tour. Regulation, Obama told the Stanford audience, has to be part of the answer to solve the disinformation crisis. In other words, he went to Silicon Valley to threaten his listeners that he would ruin their financial model by stripping away social media’s liability exemptions.

The purpose of Obama’s speech was to present a choice to his audience: Either you impose a scorched-earth policy against the establishment’s opponents, or else you will face the kind of regulation that every company knows will be its death knell. Moreover, if they made the right choice, Obama showed, there was money in it for them.

“In effect, Obama announced that the funding channels are open for people who want to do disinformation work,” said Mike Benz, executive director of the Foundation for Freedom Online. “It’s like what happened with climate change. If you were an academic who wanted federal funding for anything, you made sure you made reference to climate to get grants. Same now with disinformation. Obama was saying, ‘here’s where the puck is moving, so skate here if you want federal funding.’”

So like a crime boss, Obama made them an offer they couldn't refuse. And for good measure, he made an example out of Zuckerberg, effectively ensuring that Zuck woke up with a horse's head in his bed.

But oh, he added sweeteners to the obedient. And yes, he was powerful enough to control distribution of federal funding, even out of office with his little operatives still in place. Obama determined who'd get what, distributing the spoils to loyalists on the very fakey-fake matter of "disinformation" which is why we saw freaks like that Mary Poppins woman, Nina Jankowicz, show up as a "disinformation expert" for a federal job as Joe Biden's "disinformation czar" even though she had an account on TikTok of all places, a Red Chinese data-gathering operation that spies on its users and builds profiles on them. Jankowicz didn't know much about disinformation, at least not enough to avoid some very avoidable spying on her by China. It was the money, honey, where Obama said the money was.

And Smith noted that there was a lot of money shoveled out for this purpose by the Biden administration on various characters in attendence at universities who attended this Obama speech tour. In some cases, it was a surge of federal money.

So, fail to censor President Trump, get dressed down, get "fined" $400 million to rig the next elections, get a phony whistleblower coming after your company. Sign up for the phony disinformation gig, hit the swamp jackpot.

What an ugly picture this paints for how the federal government has been transformed by leftists. Once upon a time, one could trust that the government would try to do the right thing. Now, all we can see is that Obama still runs the government from his retirement, plays a key role in muscling corporations into wokedom, including the all-important business of electing Democrats and nothing is beyond bounds, nor being done about it.

Is this an ex-president or a crime boss? It's pretty obvious what the answer to that is.

Read the whole thing here.